VOOZH about

URL: https://forum.wordreference.com/threads/commonwealth.3624480/

⇱ commonwealth | WordReference Forums


Menu


Install the app
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

commonwealth

stephenlearner

Senior Member
Chinese
Hello,

One of the definitions of commonwealth is this:
Government(cap.) [Eng. Hist.] the English government from the abolition of the monarchy in 1649 until the establishment of the Protectorate in 1653, sometimes extended to include the restoration of Charles II in 1660.

I wonder what commonwealth means in this context. Is it a republic? If so, why did not the politicians then call their system a republic, but a commonwealth? Historically speaking, republic had been more well-known than commonwealth to the European people, especially the politicians.

Thank you very much.
Some countries (and some U.S. states) call themselves a "commonwealth" instead of a "country" or a "sovereign nation" or a "republic". I am not sure if there is a precise rule for which word is used. I have always assumed they were just different words.

So maybe I will learn something in this thread.
For the reference to the English government in the 17th century, 'commonwealth' does mean 'republic'. Thus the OED, sense 3:

A state in which the supreme power is vested in the people; a republic or democratic state.

But commonwealth has other meanings and is used to just mean a state or a body. It is used in the official title of some American states (Kentucky, Massachussetts, Pennsylvania and Virginia) and of the federated states of Australia (Commonwealth of Australia).
Historically speaking, republic had been more well-known than commonwealth to the European people, especially the politicians.
I am not sure this was the case in mid-seventeenth century England, and it seems that "republic" may have been used to mean "state" in general, without any particular idea of how it was ruled. "Commonwealth" seems to have been a word much in use in England at the time, and would have been a far more potent rallying cry. The English Civil War was still going on, and I expect far more people were attracted to the idea of wealth being shared instead of being concentrated in the hands of the king and nobles, than by a system of government that very few would have been able to participate in, even as electors.
A commonwealth could be headed by a sovereign. A republic (based on the Roman ideal) can't.
Back
Top Bottom